The US 2020 Presidential Election & Attempts To Overturn It

[TopHatter]

Giuliani Sat for Voluntary Interview in Jan. 6 Investigation
The onetime personal lawyer for Donald Trump answered questions from federal prosecutors about the former president’s efforts to remain in power after his 2020 election loss.


Rudolph W. Giuliani, who served as former President Donald J. Trump’s personal lawyer, interviewed with Jack Smith, the special counsel investigating the former president.

Rudolph W. Giuliani, who served as former President Donald J. Trump’s personal lawyer, was interviewed last week by federal prosecutors investigating Mr. Trump’s efforts to overturn the 2020 election, people familiar with the matter said.

The voluntary interview, which took place under what is known as a proffer agreement, was a significant development in the election interference investigation led by Jack Smith, the special counsel, and the latest indication that Mr. Smith and his team are actively seeking witnesses who might cooperate in the case.

The session with Mr. Giuliani, the people familiar with it said, touched on some of the most important aspects of the special counsel’s inquiry into the ways that Mr. Trump sought to maintain his grip on power after losing the election to Joseph R. Biden Jr.

“The appearance was entirely voluntary and conducted in a professional manner,” said Ted Goodman, a political adviser to Mr. Giuliani.

A proffer agreement is an understanding between prosecutors and people who are subjects of criminal investigations that can precede a formal cooperation deal. The subjects agree to provide useful information to the government, sometimes to tell their side of events, to stave off potential charges or to avoid testifying under subpoena before a grand jury. In exchange, prosecutors agree not to use those statements against them in future criminal proceedings unless it is determined they were lying.

Prosecutors working for Mr. Smith asked Mr. Giuliani about a plan to create fake slates of pro-Trump electors in key swing states that were actually won by Mr. Biden, one person familiar with the matter said, speaking on the condition of anonymity to discuss an ongoing criminal investigation. They focused specifically on the role played in that effort by John Eastman, another lawyer who advised Mr. Trump about ways to stay in office after his defeat.

Mr. Giuliani also discussed Sidney Powell, a lawyer who was briefly tied to Mr. Trump’s campaign and who made baseless claims about a cabal of foreign actors hacking into voting machines to steal the election from Mr. Trump, the person said.

Ms. Powell, who was sanctioned by a federal judge for promoting conspiracy theories about the voting machines, also took part in a meeting in the Oval Office in December 2020 during which Mr. Trump was presented with a brazen plan — opposed by Mr. Giuliani — to use the military to seize control of voting machines and rerun the election.

The person said that prosecutors further asked Mr. Giuliani about the scene at the Willard Hotel days before the attack on the Capitol. Mr. Giuliani and a group of close Trump advisers — among them, Mr. Eastman, Mr. Trump’s former chief strategist Stephen K. Bannon and Mr. Trump’s current adviser Boris Epshteyn — had gathered at the hotel, near the White House, to discuss strategies before a violent mob stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6, 2021, disrupting the certification of Mr. Biden’s victory over Mr. Trump.

The proffer session with Mr. Giuliani, elements of which were reported earlier by CNN, came as Mr. Smith’s team pressed ahead with its election interference inquiry of Mr. Trump even as it prepares for the former president’s trial on separate charges of putting national security secrets at risk and obstructing government efforts to recover classified documents.

The prosecutors have been bringing witnesses before a grand jury and conducting separate interviews of others as they seek to assemble a fuller picture of the various ways in which Mr. Trump and his allies were promoting baseless claims that the election had been stolen from him and seeking to reverse his electoral defeat.

In some cases, they appear to be gauging whether they can elicit useful information without necessarily agreeing to formal cooperation deals.

Last week, The New York Times reported that prosecutors were in negotiations to reach a proffer agreement with Michael Roman, the former director of Election Day operations for Mr. Trump’s 2020 campaign. Mr. Roman was also instrumental in helping put together the so-called fake elector plan.

The push to assemble slates of pro-Trump electors from swing states won by Mr. Biden is one of a number of components of Mr. Smith’s investigation. Prosecutors have also scrutinized whether Mr. Trump and his allies bilked donors by raising money through false claims of election fraud, examined efforts to use the Justice Department to give credence to election-fraud claims and sought to piece together a detailed picture of the role played by Mr. Trump in inciting the attack on the Capitol and the disruption of the congressional certification of his loss.

It remains unclear whether Mr. Giuliani will face charges in the special counsel’s investigation. He is also under scrutiny on many of the same subjects by the district attorney in Fulton County, Ga., who is pursuing a wide-ranging investigation into Mr. Trump’s effort to reverse his election loss in that swing state.

As part of Mr. Smith’s inquiry, prosecutors questioned Mr. Roman’s deputy, Gary Michael Brown, last week in front of a grand jury in Federal District Court in Washington that has been investigating the attempts by Mr. Trump and his allies to overturn the election. Federal prosecutors on Wednesday are also scheduled to interview Brad Raffensperger, the secretary of state of Georgia, who took a call from Mr. Trump in early January 2021 during which the former president asked him to “find” sufficient votes that would put him over the top in the election in that state.

A longtime ally of Mr. Trump who served two terms as New York City’s mayor, Mr. Giuliani effectively led the former president’s attempts to overturn his defeat in the last presidential race and has for months been a chief focus of the Justice Department’s broad investigation into the postelection period. His name has appeared on several subpoenas sent to former aides to Mr. Trump and to a host of Republican state officials involved in the plan to create fake slates of electors.

Last year, shortly before Mr. Smith was appointed to his job as special counsel, the Justice Department issued a subpoena to Mr. Giuliani for records related to his representation of Mr. Trump, including those that detailed any payments he had received. A group of federal prosecutors including Thomas Windom had been pursuing various strands of the inquiry into Mr. Trump’s efforts to remain in power before Mr. Smith’s appointment and they continue to play key roles in the investigation.

Among the things that prosecutors have been examining are the inner workings of Mr. Trump’s fund-raising vehicle, Save America PAC. The records subpoenaed from Mr. Giuliani could include some related to payments made by the PAC, according to a person familiar with the matter.

More recently, prosecutors have been asking questions about Mr. Trump’s false claims that his defeat in the election was caused by widespread fraud, and how he aggressively raised money off those claims. The prosecutors have drilled down on the issue of whether people around Mr. Trump knew that he had lost the race, but continued raising money off the fraud claims anyway.

The House select committee that investigated the attack on the Capitol on Jan. 6 first raised questions publicly about Mr. Trump’s fund-raising, and the special counsel’s team has picked up on that thread. Among other questions they have asked witnesses is whether their lawyers are being paid for by the political action committee that became a repository for money raised off Mr. Trump’s false claims of widespread fraud.

Investigators have walked through a timeline with various witnesses, including asking people about election night and what Mr. Giuliani may have been telling Mr. Trump before his defiant speech declaring he had won the election, as well as about Jan. 6 and Mr. Trump’s actions that day.

The special counsel’s office has focused on Mr. Trump’s mind-set and who was telling him he lost, according to people familiar with the questions. Among the questions has been whether there were concerns raised among people working with the campaign as to the language used in television ads about fraud in December 2020, and who signed off on the ad copy.

Prosecutors also subpoenaed former Vice President Mike Pence, who was a key focus of Mr. Trump’s efforts to stay in power as Mr. Trump tried to pressure him to use his ceremonial role overseeing congressional certification to block Mr. Biden from being certified.
_________

"Tough-on-crime former mayor seeks leniency from prosecutor for his own crimes."

Story at eleven

[Albany Rifles]

_________

"Tough-on-crime former mayor seeks leniency from prosecutor for his own crimes."

Story at eleven

He is so screwed. Maybe he can get a job at Four Seasons Landscaping!

[TopHatter]

Giuliani’s Sit-Down With Jack Smith Is Bad News for Trump
What this looks like to a former federal prosecutor.

THIS WEEK, SPECULATION mounted about a second potential federal indictment against former President Donald Trump arising from his unlawful retention of government documents. The speculation was fed by Tuesday’s leak of an audio recording of Trump strongly suggesting he was showing a top secret contingency war plan to unauthorized individuals at his resort in Bedminster, New Jersey in July 2021. The speculation held that because of risks involved in the first indictment in the case, issued in Florida earlier this month, a second indictment in New Jersey could serve as a sort of “backup.”

But another bombshell Wednesday hinted at why Special Counsel Jack Smith may feel no need for such a backup indictment. Trump’s former personal lawyer, Rudy Giuliani, has reportedly made a “proffer” of potential January 6th-related testimony. Smith appears to be steaming toward an indictment relating to Trump’s role on January 6th.

That case would be brought in Washington, D.C., where prosecutors have won every trial involving January 6th participants.

Before we unpack what we know and what we can reasonably surmise, here’s a little background: “Proffers” consist of evidence and leads that “profferors” can give prosecutors. Proffers are based on understandings between the parties that give the potential witness a “free pass” to provide everything that might help the prosecution. Truthful information provided cannot be used against the witness offering it. Most often that information is about someone in the prosecutor’s crosshairs.

Proffers can occur in various situations, including when the profferor is not seeking to become a cooperating witness in exchange for leniency. One example is where a subpoenaed grand jury witness, if compelled to testify, will assert the Fifth Amendment. A proffer allows prosecutors to learn something about what the witness has to say. The advantage for profferors is that the information provided cannot be used against them.

HERE’S WHY I THINK that Giuliani is indeed seeking to cooperate.

First, however nonsensical Giuliani’s past thinking and public utterances have been, facing prosecution tends to focus the mind. Giuliani likely sees his freedom at risk because he was so central to Trump’s attempt to overturn the 2020 election before January 6th.

Among other things, after the 2020 election, Giuliani, along with Trump himself, pressured Arizona House Speaker Rusty Bowers to help reverse the certification of Joe Biden’s election, though Giuliani admitted not having evidence to justify such a move. Giuliani also reportedly led the Trump “fake electors” campaign, which aimed to send Congress phony slates of electors from battleground states to provide a pretext for then-Vice President Mike Pence to reject or delay certification of President Joe Biden’s election.

The New York Times reported on Wednesday that in the proffer session, “Mr. Smith asked Mr. Giuliani about [the] plan to create fake slates” of electors. Giuliani was also reportedly asked about his role with Steve Bannon, Trump lawyer John Eastman, and others at a command center at the Willard Hotel near the White House on January 6th itself.

Second, Giuliani probably figures that at this point he owes Trump nothing. Author Michael Wolff reported that in 2021, after Rudy’s over-the-top labors attacking the 2020 election, Trump gave Rudy “the cold shoulder,” irked that “he tried to get paid for his election challenge work.” Of all things!

Third, Giuliani and his lawyers surely feel the prosecutorial vise tightening on him. Two of Nevada’s fake electors have testified before Smith’s grand jury. So has Trump campaign official Gary Michael Brown, who was reportedly connected to the fake-electors scheme, while his boss, Michael Roman, has now reportedly reached a cooperation agreement with Smith. Even Mark Meadows, Trump’s last White House chief of staff, who emailed about the need “to have someone coordinating the [fake] electors for states,” is reported to have testified in Smith’s probe.

And Giuliani has witnessed how Smith has obtained court orders piercing the attorney-client privilege to compel other Trump lawyers’ testimony about their communications with Trump. As to Giuliani, we don’t know whether Smith has already done so in a closed proceeding.

You can see why Rudy might wish to cooperate: The best deals fly away quickly to co-conspirators who come to prosecutors first. Or, as they say, the early worms catch the birds.

Fourth, while prosecutors can’t use the words in a proffer directly against the profferor, those words can be used by prosecutors as leads to investigate a future case against the person interviewed. Would Rudy really want to provide that help without seeking a deal to obtain some leniency in return?

Finally, Giuliani is a target in Georgia. Boy, would he love Jack Smith’s help brokering a global deal with Fulton County District Attorney Fani Willis.

To tempt prosecutors to make a deal, potential cooperators have every incentive to spill their guts. Prosecutors can use against profferors any facts they omitted.

Jack Smith’s prosecutorial team is a freight train barreling down the tracks at full speed, with one destination in mind: Applying the law and the facts to the person or persons atop the chain of command on January 6th. Rudy would be smart to get out of the way.

From the evidence amassed by the House January 6th Committee and the public reporting about Smith’s investigation, we know that a trial against Trump in Washington is unlikely to come out well for him. He understands that the best he can do is derail the train by winning the 2024 election.

Keeping that from happening is not Jack Smith’s job. It’s ours.
________

[TopHatter]

Arizona Secretary of State's Office subpoenaed by Special Counsel Jack Smith in Jan. 6 inquiry

U.S. Department of Justice Special Counsel Jack Smith subpoenaed the Arizona Secretary of State's Office as recently as May as part of his investigation into the events leading up to the Jan. 6 insurrection at the U.S. Capitol.

Smith's office also talked to GOP lawmakers in the spring about events in the wake of the 2020 presidential election.

The inquiries highlight the key role Arizona played in the 2020 presidential election, where Joe Biden edged out Trump by 10,457 votes — the narrowest margin in the nation. The election has drawn ongoing scrutiny since the polls closed in November 2020, extending to a contentious state Senate review of Maricopa County's presidential ballots and numerous lawsuits.

The subpoenas to the Secretary of State's Office were not previously publicly known. They sought information related to two lawsuits, one from Trump's campaign and another from former Arizona Republican Party Chairwoman Kelli Ward, that alleged errors and fraud in the 2020 presidential results.

A spokesman for Secretary of State Adrian Fontes said the law firm of Coppersmith Brockelman, the outside counsel which represents the office, complied with the requests.

Despite Smith's subpoenas to the secretary of state and lawmakers, the special counsel apparently has not reached out to former Gov. Doug Ducey, a Republican who played a pivotal role in certifying that Joe Biden won the presidential race in Arizona.

Ducey, talking to an unnamed donor earlier this year, marveled that Smith or his investigators had not contacted him, the Washington Post reported. Ducey famously silenced a call from Trump that rang on his cellphone as the governor was certifying the 2020 election results.

The former governor did not directly reply to a query about whether he has since heard from the special counsel's office. His spokesman, Daniel Scarpinato, instead released a statement saying reports that then-President Trump tried to pressure Ducey to overturn Arizona's election results was old news.

“This is nothing more than a ‘copy and paste’ of a compilation of articles from the past two years," Scarpinato said in a statement responding to the Post's story and sent to The Republic in response to an inquiry about the report.

"Frankly, nothing here is new nor is it news to anyone following this issue since 2020. Gov. Ducey defended the results of Arizona’s 2020 election, he certified the election, and he made it clear that the certification provided a trigger for credible complaints backed by evidence to be brought forward. None were ever brought forward.

"The governor stands by his action to certify the election and considers the issue to be in the rear view mirror — it’s time to move on.”

But federal investigators have not moved on from the election, where resistance to the outcome led to protests culminating in the Jan. 6 attack on the Capitol.

In Georgia, which had the second-closest margin of victory for Biden, Secretary of State Brad Raffensperger has met with federal investigators about Trump's call demanding he “find 11,780 votes" to reverse the election's outcome.

The Fulton County District Attorney's Office has spent more than two years investigating whether Trump and his allies illegally meddled in the 2020 election.

Pence: No pressure from Trump about Arizona
On CBS' "Face the Nation" last weekend, former Vice President Mike Pence confirmed that Trump asked him to talk to Ducey about the election results, but said he had no pressure from the president to find evidence that Trump actually won the Arizona vote.

It is unclear why Smith has not contacted Ducey, if indeed he has not. His staff has sought records and interviews from other Arizonans involved in the election's contentious aftermath.

In May, the special counsel's office sought documents from the Secretary of State's Office related to discovery, proposed exhibits and communications with opposing attorneys related to two election-related lawsuits.

One case, Donald J. Trump for President, Inc. v. Hobbs, argued several voters wrongly had their ballots tossed because they overvoted, or voted twice in a race with only one choice. A Maricopa County Superior Court judge dismissed the complaint, noting there were not enough ballots in question to alter the outcome of the election.

The second case, Ward v. Jackson, was filed by Kelli Ward, then the chairwoman of the Arizona Republican Party. It argued Maricopa County election workers weren't qualified to verify signatures on mail-in ballots and that poll observers weren't present when damaged ballots were replicated.

The court found no evidence of fraud and dismissed the case, which was appealed to the state Supreme Court and then the U.S. Supreme Court without success.

Although the two cases listed in the subpoena involved Maricopa County proceedings, the county attorney's civil division chief, Tom Liddy, said Monday that he was unaware of any recent requests from the special counsel. The county previously was subpoenaed for records pertaining to correspondence with Trump, Liddy said.

A 'check-the-box' interview with investigators
Several state lawmakers received subpoenas in February from the special counsel's office, also seeking information about events in the aftermath of the 2020 election.

House Speaker Ben Toma said he sat for a several-hours-long interview in Phoenix with one investigator and two FBI agents in March.

“They had lots of questions about what happened, who I talked to and so on," said Toma, a Glendale Republican who at the time was the incoming majority leader.

Toma said it was a friendly interview, which he characterized as a "check the box" kind of interaction. He added that he doesn't think he was of much help, since none of the "powers that be" tried to contact him to undo the election results.

Those requests fell on former House Speaker Rusty Bowers, who was facing pressure from Trump allies as well as from some members of the GOP caucus to do something to reject the election results. Bowers rebuffed the requests, saying he never was provided any proof of wrongdoing.

It is unclear if Bowers was subpoenaed by the special counsel; when asked about it in February he said he was advised to not comment. He did not return a request for comment on Monday.

Senators, supervisor also queried
Senate President Warren Petersen, R-Gilbert, as well as two Senate colleagues also received subpoenas in February. The Senate ordered a review of Maricopa County ballots in the presidential and U.S. Senate races in 2021.

Petersen, in a text message, said he complied with a request to disclose communications with a list of Trump allies, of which he recognized only one: Trump attorney Rudy Giuliani. He said he didn't sit for an interview.

Sen. Sonny Borrelli, R-Lake Havasu City, and former Sen. Michelle Ugenti-Rita, R-Scottsdale, also received subpoenas, but have not responded to requests for comment about their responses.

Maricopa County Supervisor Clint Hickman said representatives of the Department of Justice interviewed him late last year and he has not heard anything since. Hickman, along with the other four supervisors, received heavy criticism from Trump supporters for defending how Maricopa County conducted the election.

Hickman was the target of a death threat from a Trump supporter in Iowa. In April, that man pleaded guilty to federal charges of threatening an election official.

A year ago, the FBI subpoenaed Karen Fann, then the state Senate president, and Kelly Townsend, for any communications or records they had concerning Trump's efforts to nullify the 2020 election results. Both women said they complied with the request.

On Monday, Townsend said the questions in her FBI interview were focused solely on which Trump lawyers she and other legislators spoke with.
_________

I see Mike Pence is doing his usual waffling back and forth

[Albany Rifles]

_________

I see Mike Pence is doing his usual waffling back and forth

My dude has the spine of a piece of spaghetti

[tbm3fan]

My dude has the spine of a piece of spaghetti

Reminds me of this

[TopHatter]

Trump Election Lawyer Facing Disbarment Decides to Go Ahead and Just Retire
Lin Wood, one of the foremost pushers of the Big Lie, is asking the State Bar of Georgia State Bar to let him voluntarily turn in his law license


Attorney Lin Wood on Wednesday, Dec. 2, 2020, in Alpharetta, Ga.

LIN WOOD, A former member of Donald Trump’s legal team and one of the foremost pushers of the lie that the 2020 election was rigged, has permanently retired from practicing law.

Wood isn’t exactly riding into the sunset after an esteemed career. He’s faced a slew of legal action since his effort to overturn President Joe Biden’s win failed, which the The Daily Beast recounted last month. Wood and some of his colleagues have been accused of misconduct in Michigan for filing bogus election lawsuits; he’s feuded with various other right-wing conspiracists and three of his former colleagues have sued him for defamation; and the state of Georgia held a disciplinary trail in May and is currently deciding whether to disbar him. His permanent retirement would prevent the state from doing so.

“I hereby request that I be permitted to transfer to Retired Status effectively immediately,” he wrote in a letter filed to the State Bar of Georgia on Tuesday. “I further understand and acknowledge that if granted Retired Status I am prohibited from practicing law in this State and in any other state or jurisdiction and that I may not apply for readmission.” Wood added that he is aware that he can’t retire without permission from the state bar, given that “there are two disciplinary proceedings pending against me.”

Wood is certainly not the first former Trump lawyer to come under legal fire following the effort to overturn the 2020 election. Rudy Giuliani and Sidney Powell have both been sued for defamation for pushing lies about rigged voting machines. John Eastman, the mastermind of the fake electors scheme that supposedly would have allowed Trump to stay in office, is facing nearly a dozen disciplinary charges the State Bar Court of California and could be disbarred himself. The home of Jeffrey Clark, the former Justice Department official Trump wanted to elevate to attorney general, was raided by the FBI last year as part of the DOJ’s investigation into the effort to overturn the election. Giuliani, Powell, Eastman, and Clark have all been in the crosshairs of federal prosecutors, and Wood was called to testify in Fulton County District

Wood is may be the most caustic and conspiratorial character of the lot, though. He’s waged war against several prominent right-wing figures, accusing Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene and former National Security Adviser Michael Flynn of being Deep State operatives. He even told The Daily Beast that Greene was “under the influence of the devil.”

“I look at the people who have come out and attacked me, the commentators in the media: Tucker Carlson; Dan Bongino; this guy with the fake accent, Sebastian Gorka; the guy that runs Turning Point USA, Charlie Kirk,” he told far-right podcaster Stew Peters in 2021. “Not one of those people ever picked up the phone and tried to reach me to get my side of the story. They’re all in it together. If you want to start identifying Deep State members of the media, start looking at the people — including Sean Hannity — that set this up to attack Lin Wood.”

It stands to reason that it’s probably not a good idea for Wood to continuing practicing law, one way or another.
________

Adios asshole...

[Albany Rifles]

________

Adios asshole...

This asshole and his pals did too much damage to this country to just say "My bad!" and take his toys and go home. He needs to face the full disbarment procedure and any legal ramifications for his actions.

[Monash]

This asshole and his pals did too much damage to this country to just say "My bad!" and take his toys and go home. He needs to face the full disbarment procedure and any legal ramifications for his actions.

Not going to happen. He'll be allowed to hand in his shingle and retire into well deserved obscurity, albeit he will never escape the judgement history will place on his actions. That said I would respectfully caution against any kind of 'righteous indignation, punishment humiliation, prosecution to the fullest extent of the law' approach to the man. IMO it smacks just a tad to much of Trump's and his MAGA followers approach to 'justice' in America.

You do NOT want to be one of their ilk.

[Albany Rifles]

Not going to happen. He'll be allowed to hand in his shingle and retire into well deserved obscurity, albeit he will never escape the judgement history will place on his actions. That said I would respectfully caution against any kind of 'righteous indignation, punishment humiliation, prosecution to the fullest extent of the law' approach to the man. IMO it smacks just a tad to much of Trump's and his MAGA followers approach to 'justice' in America.

You do NOT want to be one of their ilk.

Not calling for that. But he should face some kind of sanctions and not be allowed to quietly ride off into the sunset.

[Monash]

Not calling for that. But he should face some kind of sanctions and not be allowed to quietly ride off into the sunset.

Would be nice but it's basically a binary decision. He either does or does not get disbarred. You have to assume he saw the writing on the wall and took preemptive action to avoid the humiliation involved in the event formal disbarment proceedings were initiated. And there's no way in hell the relevant Sate Bar Association was going to look a gift horse in the mouth like that and actually (God Forbid) be proactive and initiate action against a member who has brought the legal profession into disrepute.

[Albany Rifles]

Would be nice but it's basically a binary decision. He either does or does not get disbarred. You have to assume he saw the writing on the wall and took preemptive action to avoid the humiliation involved in the even t formal disbarment proceedings were initiated. And there's no way in hell the relevant Sate Bar Association was going to look a gift horse in the mouth like that and actauly (God Forbid) be proactive and initiate action against a member who has brought the legal profession into disrepute via his actions.

I see your logic...Just tired of organizations not following what should be basic ethics.

But I'm almost 65 so I have seen more than my share of disappointment over the decades.

[TopHatter]

Trump is notified he's a target of the US criminal probe into efforts to overturn the 2020 election

WASHINGTON (AP) — Former President Donald Trump said Tuesday he has received a letter informing him that he is a target of the Justice Department's investigation into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 presidential election, an indication he could soon be charged by U.S. prosecutors.

New federal charges, on top of existing state and federal counts in New York and Florida and a separate election-interference investigation nearing conclusion in Georgia, would add to the list of legal problems for Trump as he pursues the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.

Trump disclosed the existence of a target letter in a post on his Truth Social platform, saying he received it Sunday night and that he anticipates being indicted. Such a letter often precedes an indictment and is used to advise individuals under investigation that prosecutors have gathered evidence linking them to a crime; Trump, for instance, received one soon before being charged last month in a separate investigation into the illegal retention of classified documents.

A spokesman for special counsel Jack Smith, whose office is leading the investigation, declined to comment.

Legal experts have said potential charges could include conspiracy to defraud the United States and obstruction of an official proceeding, in this case Congress’ certification of President Joe Biden’s electoral victory.

Smith’s team has cast a broad net in its investigation into attempts by Trump and his allies to block the transfer of power to Biden in the days leading up to the Jan. 6 riot at the U.S. Capitol, when Trump loyalists stormed the building in a bid to disrupt the certification of state electoral votes in Congress. More than 1,000 people accused of participating in the riot have been charged.

Smith’s probe has centered on a broad range of efforts by Trump and allies to keep him in office, including the role played by lawyers in pressing for the overturning of results as well as plans for slates of fake electors in multiple battleground states won by Biden to submit false electoral certificates to Congress.

Prosecutors have questioned multiple Trump administration officials before a grand jury in Washington, including former Vice President Mike Pence, who was repeatedly pressured by Trump to ignore his constitutional duty and block the counting in Congress of electoral votes on Jan. 6.

They’ve also interviewed other Trump advisers, including former Trump lawyer Rudy Giuliani, as well as local election officials in states including Michigan and New Mexico who endured a pressure campaign from the then-president about overturning election results in their states. A lawyer for Giuliani, who participated in a voluntary interview, said Tuesday that he did not receive a target letter.

Trump has consistently denied wrongdoing and did so again in his Tuesday post, writing, "Under the United States Constitution, I have the right to protest an Election that I am fully convinced was Rigged and Stolen. just as the Democrats have done against me in 2016, and many others have done over the ages.”

Trump remains the Republican party’s dominant frontrunner, despite indictments in New York arising from hush money payments during his 2016 campaign and in Florida, which seem to have had little impact on his standing in the crowded GOP field. The indictments also have helped his campaign raise millions of dollars from supporters, though he raised far less after the second than the first, raising questions about whether subsequent charges will have the same impact.

Asked about the letter during a press conference in South Carolina, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, Trump’s most serious challenger, said he hadn’t seen it and “can’t speak about that,” but delivered his most forceful critique to date of Trump's inaction on Jan. 6.

“I think it was shown how he was in the White House and didn’t do anything while things were going on. He should have come out more forcefully,” DeSantis said. However, he added, “But to try to criminalize that, that’s a different issue entirely.”

Trump was to travel to Iowa Tuesday, where he was taping a town hall with Fox News host Sean Hannity.

One purpose of a target letter is to advise a potential defendant that he or she has a right to appear before the grand jury. Trump said in his post that he has been given “a very short 4 days to report to the Grand Jury, which almost always means an Arrest and indictment." Aides did not immediately respond to questions seeking further information.

Prosecutors in Georgia are conducting a separate investigation into efforts by Trump to reverse his election loss in that state, with the top prosecutor in Fulton County signaling that she expects to announce charging decisions next month.

In his post on Tuesday, Trump wrote that “they have now effectively indicted me three times ... with a probably fourth coming from Atlanta” and added in capital letters, “This witch hunt is all about election interference and a complete and total political weaponization of law enforcement."

Trump was indicted last month on 37 federal felony counts in relation to accusations of illegally retaining hundreds of classified documents at his Florida estate, Mar-a-Lago. He has pleaded not guilty. A pretrial conference in that case was set for Tuesday afternoon in Fort Pierce, Fla.
____

Finally.

[TopHatter]

Experts: Jack Smith’s latest move means Trump can’t use Judge Cannon to prevent pre-election trial


Jack Smith Tom Brenner for The Washington Post via Getty Images

Legal experts expect Donald Trump to be indicted in the Justice Department's Jan. 6 probe after he received a target letter from special counsel Jack Smith's team, predicting it will blow up the former president's attempts to delay his federal proceedings until after the 2024 election. Smith informed Trump that he is a target of the probe after bringing charges against him in the Mar-a-Lago documents probe. Trump has sought to delay the trial indefinitely, citing his election campaign.

"This means that Trump will be indicted in the January 6th investigation," former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti tweeted about the target letter. "This indictment will likely be brought in D.C. federal court, which means that the importance of Judge Aileen Cannon's rulings in the Mar-a-Lago case are diminished." MSNBC legal analyst Lisa Rubin agreed that the implication of the likely indictment in D.C. is that even "if Cannon caves to Trump's demands not to set ANY trial date, she now can't single-handedly prevent a federal trial before Election Day. The federal judges in DC have handled [hundreds] of 1/6 cases rapidly—and his should be no exception."

Former U.S. Attorney Harry Litman called the looming D.C. indictment a "seismic event that among other things will recalibrate the timeline." Most judges in D.C., he added, "are used to (and fed up with) Trump's maneuvers and sensitive to need to move quickly."
_______

And there it is...

[TopHatter]

"Sounds like Rudy flipped:" Giuliani evades Jan. 6 target letter after meeting with prosecutors


Rudy Giuliani Michael M. Santiago/Getty Images

Former President Donald Trump received a target letter from special counsel Jack Smith in the January 6 investigation but his former attorney, ex-New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, evaded a similar fate after meeting with prosecutors.

Giuliani has not received a target letter, his attorney told CNN's Paula Reid, and he does not expect to be charged after he completed a voluntary interview with special counsel investigators several weeks ago.

The former president on Tuesday announced in a lengthy statement shared on Truth Social that the special counsel had informed him that he was a target of the Justice Department's probe into efforts to overturn the 2020 presidential election. Trump's target letter could be a sign of another criminal indictment for the ex-president, per ABC News, which would mark his third in recent months. In June, Trump was federally indicted for allegedly mishandling classified documents at his Mar-a-Lago estate, and in March, a Manhattan grand jury voted to indict him on charges related to a 2016 hush-money payment made to adult film actress Stormy Daniels.

Giuliani avoiding charges suggests that he may have "flipped to some degree," national security attorney Bradley Moss tweeted.

Giuliani met with prosecutors for two days "queen for a day" proffer sessions, in which individuals share useful information with prosecutors in exchange for limited immunity, according to The Messenger.

Giuliani attorney Robert Costello denied that the former mayor had flipped earlier this week.

"I can tell you point blank, outright, without fear of retribution or correction, there was no quid pro quo," Costello told The Messenger. "We didn't get anything in return. We were telling the truth and we had nothing to hide because Rudy Giuliani didn't do anything wrong. It's that simple."

Costello added that "there is nothing" for Trump or anyone associated with him to "worry about because we didn't implicate anybody in anything."

Asked if Giuliani would accept a cooperation agreement in exchange for immunity, Costello said "I'm not gonna answer their speculative question like that. They're not going to charge him."

But while proffer sessions typically last for a day, it is highly unusual for Giuliani to have met with prosecutors for two days.

"That is not standard operating procedure," former federal prosecutor and defense attorney Mitchell Epner told the outlet.

"One day? You don't know what to make of [it]," added Trump's former White House lawyer Ty Cobb. "Two days though suggests that the DOJ may be considering his value as a witness."

An unnamed source told The Messenger that Costello would not have sent Giuliani in for one day, let alone two, without asking something in return.

"I'm sure the pressure is immense," the source said. "At this point in Rudy's age and career, does that matter?"

Attorney Joseph Bondy, who represented former Giuliani associate Lev Parnas in connection to the Trump Ukraine scandal, told the outlet that Giuliani finds himself in a "different landscape" now that he is "no longer protected by the Trump cabal."

"The question is really, will he fall on the sword and protect the former president — who, it currently appears, could care less about him — or attempt to cooperate with the special prosecutor and mitigate the potential for conviction and a prison sentence at the age of 79?" he said.

While Giuliani may have evaded charges in connection to the federal probe, "Rudy has decent odds of being charged in Georgia," tweeted Georgia State University Law Prof. Anthony Michael Kreis.

Fulton County, Ga., District Attorney Fani Willis informed Giuliani last year that he is a target of her probe into TrumpWorld efforts to overturn his 2020 election loss in the state. Willis is expected to hand down indictments in the probe in late July or early August.
_____

"I can tell you point blank, outright, without fear of retribution or correction, there was no quid pro quo,"

Translation: Of course he flipped, wtf do you think happened??